Managing Cross-Cultural

Sensitivities & Conflicts

Pijus Kanti Das

Birla Institute of Management Technology
Greater Noida

1|Page
 Contents
Executive Summary 3

PART I. Culture 4

1.a. What is Culture? 4

1.b. Conflict among cultures 5
1.c. Competitive advantages: Synergy among cultures 6

PART II. Cultural Diversity: Strategies to Manage and Measure it 9

2.a. Leading diversity management practices 9

2.b. Measuring cultural diversity 10
2.c. Diversity matrices 10
2.d. Diversity score card 11

PART III. Merger and Acquisition 12

3.a. The impact of cultural differences 12

3.b. Daimler-Chrysler Merger: A cultural mismatch? 12
3.c. Managing cultural attributes in cross border mergers and acquisition 13

PART. IV. Women in Management: A Cross-Cultural Overview 14

4.a. The position of women in management: A cross-cultural comparison 14

4.b. Gender-Organization-System (GOS):Explaining the barriers encountered
by women in management 15
4.c. The roads ahead 16

PART V. Cross-Cultural Communications 18

5.a. Deal focus vs. Relation focus: Communication barrier 18

5.b. Low context vs. High context communication 19
5.c. The iceberg metaphor 19
5.d. Saying it like it is vs. Saving face 20
5.e. Training for cross-cultural communication 21
5.f. Ways for improving cross-cultural interaction 21
5.g. Framework for reconciliation of cross-cultural conflict 22

PART VI. Citizen of the World: Ethics 23

6.a. Why firms exist? 23

6.b. Are ethics culture free? 23
6.c. Managing ethical dilemmas 24
6.d. Developing corporate integrity 25
6.e. Globalization 26

2|Page
 Executive Summary

The international aspirations of individuals, businesses and countries are taking an

unprecedented turn as the first decade of the 21st century comes to a close. Globalization
today encompasses not only the free-flowing exchange of goods, but of capital, technology,
even services and labour. This latest wave of globalization has resulted in unprecedented
cross-border opportunities and has unleashed powerful market forces that are reshaping who,
what, where and, most significantly, the how of doing business internationally. Culture plays
a pivotal role in this international business. The workforce of the 21st century is increasingly
diverse and multicultural. To effectively manage and lead in this environment, HR must be
knowledgeable about cross-cultural factors-on both the domestic and global fronts-in human
resource management. By promoting education in cross-cultural competencies throughout the
organization, HR can better serve the company to successfully achieve its mission and goals.

As a concept and as a reality, culture is broad and multifaceted. On a daily basis, culture
influences who we are--as individuals, families, communities, professions, industries,
organizations and nations--and how we interact with each other within and across regional
and national borders. Defined as a set of values and beliefs with learned behaviours shared
within a particular society, culture provides a sense of identity and belonging. From language,
communication styles, history and religion to norms, values, symbolism and ways of being,
"culture" is everywhere.

In this article, we shall look at the culture as: the threats and opportunities, the problems and
possibilities. Rather than experiencing cultural differences as threats to be overcome or as
unfortunate remnants of history to be endured, we will try to find out richness of cultural
differences. Rather than creating a cultural melting pot, we need to design organizations as
cultural mosaic in which each element preserves its unique value. This article is divided into
six parts, Part I argues why we need to know about culture and provides a framework which
helps not only to organize what we already know, but can also serve as a guide for how to
discovering and analyzing culture. Part II will help us in understanding diversity in today’s
global workforce and strategies to manage and measure the same. While part III talks mainly
about M&A and specially effects of culture on M&A, part IV deals with position of women
in management across the world. Next is cross cultural communication. This part is intended
as a practical guide for the men and women in the front lines of world trade, those who face
every day the frustrating differences in global business customs and practices. Finally, it is
important to realize that one’s world view is conditioned from a very early age. The world
seen through the eyes of an Australian or Korean, an Argentinean or Canadian, an African or
Greenlander looks very differently. Only by realizing that we cannot take our way of seeing
the world for granted, we have to recognise and appreciate how others see the world, and
what that might mean for our working together. Part VI discusses how we can sail through in
our journey without compromising ethical part of it.

3|Page
 I. Culture

1.a. What is Culture?

Managers who readily accept that the cuisine, the literature, the music and the art of other
countries run parallel to one another must also learn to accept that the art of management
differs in other countries. Andre Laurent, Professor INSEAD

If we were asked to describe our own culture, what would we say? Describing one’s own
culture is, in fact, not an easy task. It is a bit like asking a fish in water what it is like to swim
in the water. Washed up on the beach, the fish quickly recognizes the difference, but may not
be able to describe it. Its immediate objective is to get back into the water.

We only begin to perceive our culture when we are out of it, confronted with another. ‘I
understand my country so much better’, said Samuel Johnson, the eighteen-century British
writer, ‘when I stand in some else’s.’ Culture serves as a lens through which we perceive the
other. Like the water surrounding the fish, culture distorts how we see the world and how the
world sees us. Furthermore, we tend to use own culture as a reference point to evaluate the
other. For instance, as far as many continental Europeans are concerned the British do not
drive on the left side of the road; they drive on the wrong side of the road.

Recognizing cultural difference is the necessary first step to anticipating potential threats and
opportunities for business encounters. But in order to go beyond awareness and to create
useful interaction, these differences need to be open for discussion. One model known as the
‘Johari window’ (S. Jourard, 1964)1 provides a way of discussing and negotiating the
different perspective, as shown below:

What I see What I do not see

What they
Open for discussion My blind spot
see
What they do
Their blind spot Shared blind spot
not see
Unconscious

Johari Window

The Johari window tries to shed light on what I know and do not know about myself and
what others know and do not know about me. Through self-disclosure and feedback, we can
become more aware of the potential blind spots in how we see ourselves and how others see
us that may interfere with effective interaction. This technique, popular in the 1960s era of
sensitivity training in the US, may be helpful in making cultural differences open to
discussion. For example, an American colleague tends to be rather direct and explicit when

4|Page
making a point. Her Belgian colleagues often try to advise her to be more subtle or
diplomatic. This characteristic of being direct is one that both parties are aware of and which
can therefore be discussed and joked about. In other respects, she may be seen as ‘typically
American’ in ways that she does not even suspect. To be told ‘That’s so American!’ can be
quite disconcerting when she is not sure why, and tends to elicit a defensive response.

On the other hand, there are features of American culture which she knows but they either do
not know or may have misapprehended. This provides opportunities to learn about cultural
richness of the other. Finally, despite the best intentions of both parties, a business
relationship can turn sour because of something cultural of which neither side is aware. Thus
they can discuss difference that are plain to see (obvious to both), and begin to explore or
shed some light on what she cannot see (her blind spot), what they cannot see (their blind
spot), and try to imagine what it is that both cannot see (shared blind spot).

For many people, discussing cultural difference is considered to be dangerous since

differences are believed to be a source of conflict. Discussions of cultural differences are thus
avoided: ‘It’s only personality’; ‘We all work for the same country’; or ‘We are all
engineers’. Another reason for avoiding discussions about cultural differences is the fear of
stereotyping, of not considering the other as a person in their own right but as ‘representative’
of their culture. However, if cultural differences cannot be discussed then they cannot be
managed – neither to avoid misunderstandings nor to develop productive synergies.

1.b. Conflict Among Cultures

There is no shortage of evidences of cross-cultural friction between businesses. In every

cross-border alliance, there are seeds of potential cultural conflict and misunderstanding. One
survey conducted by a consulting firm in Europe has found that ‘cultural differences are the
biggest source of difficulty in integrating European acquisitions’. Another found that 35
percent of senior executives ranked cultural differences as the number one problem in foreign
acquisitions (compared with 20 percent who ranked unrealistic expectations, and 13 percent
who attributed poor management).2

The problem is that this cultural malaise may go unrecognized. It may therefore be some time
before cultural differences are surfaced and diagnosed. In one Franco-American joint venture
the problem was only recognized after eight years of collaboration. Called in to investigate
problems of cooperation, a French consultant interviewing American managers was shocked
at the litany of complaints aimed at their French counterparts. Such complaints may seem
trivial at first glance, but were apparently rather important, as eight years of collaboration had
not solved them. The belated realization that cultural problems were responsible for poor
cooperation alerts us to the need to anticipate potential misunderstanding. Failure to pay
attention to culture can, in fact, have disastrous consequences.

5|Page
An American oil company set up a drilling operation on a Pacific island and hired local labor.
Within a week, all the foremen were found lined up on the floor, their throats cut. Only
afterwards did they understand that hiring younger men as foremen to boss older workers was
not acceptable in a society where age indicates status.3 Using their own cultural criteria for
recruitment, they failed to anticipate the deadly consequences.

While the reaction was far less dramatic, the next example demonstrates that subtle
differences can still have far-reaching impact. This was the case of an American firm that
purchased a textile machinery company near Birmingham, England, in the hope of using it as
a bridgehead into Europe. Shortly after the takeover, the US manager set about tackling what
he perceived to be a major production problem – the time lost on tea-breaks:

In England, tea breaks can take a half-hour per man, as each worker brew his own leaves to
his particular taste and sips out of a large, pint size vessel with the indulgence of a wine
taster. Management suggested to the union that perhaps it could use its good offices to speed
up the “sipping time”: to ten minutes a break. The union agreed to try but failed. Then one
Monday morning, the workers rioted. It seems that the company went ahead and installed a
tea-vending machine – just put a paper cup under the spigot and out pours a standard brew.
The pint-sized container was replaced by a five-ounce one imprinted – as they are in America
– with morale building messages imploring grater dedication to the job and loyalty to the
company. The plant never did get back into production. Even after the tea – brewing machine
was hauled out, workers boycotted the company and it finally closed down.4

The reason behind the preceding disasters is not only that behavior, values, and beliefs are
different across cultures, but also that their importance to those cultures should not be
underestimated. What people in one culture value or perceive as sacred (seniority or tea) may
be considered irrelevant in another culture. The trouble is that it is difficult to recognize just
what matters (and how much) to another culture – especially when we find it so hard to
recognize what is important in our own. The complaints expressed by the American managers
about their French joint-venture partner tell as much, if not more, about what is important to
the Americans or to the British.

1.c. Competitive Advantages: Synergy Among Cultures

The influence of culture on business practice can be explored in several spheres. These
cultural spheres of influence interact in complex ways that limit the relevance of simple
recipes for doing business in any particular country. When arriving in France, for example, it
is not enough to know at which end of the scale the French can be found on key dimension.
We have to recognize that providing consulting services to a pharmaceutical company in
Paris will be quite different from doing so to a tire company such as Michelin in Clermont-
Ferrand. We need to be able to recognize and assess which dimensions are relevant,
regardless of which cultural sphere of influence is operating – to know, for example, how

6|Page
relationships are managed in that particular department or unit, of that particular company, in
that particular industry, in that part of the country, or region.

Similarities among countries create regional cultures beyond national borders. For example,
around Stuttgart (Germany) the ethnic and linguistic heritage of the Alamann tribe crosses
national borders to include parts of Alsace and Switzerland. Cultural affinities remain visible
even after hundreds of years.

Research on managerial values, work attitudes, and leadership styles in different countries
has, in fact, confirmed these similarities, indicating this type of regional culture.
Near Eastern Nordic
Arab Iran, Greece Finland, Norway
Abu Dhabi Turkey Denmark Germanic
BBahrain UAE Oman Sweden

Kuwait Saudi Arabia Austria Germany

Far East & SE Malaysia Anglo United States

Taiwan S Vietnam Italy Canada Australia UK
Hong Kong Singapore South Africa
Philippines Argentina Belgium New Zealand
Thailand Venezuela France Spain Ireland
Indonesia Mexico Portugal
Chile Peru Columbia Non Anglo
Latin America
Latin American

Brazil InI India

Japan Israel

Independent

Country Cluster5

This research indicates similarities between, say, French and Italian managers (Latin) which
distinguish them from German and Austrian (Germanic) managers. These findings also imply

7|Page
that Swiss managers, whether French or German-speaking, are more similar in work attitudes
to German than to French managers. This may be fact that there are more Swiss German-
speaking cantons as compared with the other three official languages (French, Italian, and
Romansh). And Belgian managers, French – and Flemish – speaking, seem to have more in
common with their French neighbour to the south than with their Dutch neighbor to the north
given that French was the dominant language in Belgium until recently.6 In fact a proposed
merger between the Flemish Generale de Banque and a Dutch suitor was called off, citing
cultural difference as a prime reason.

It is revealing that Brazil, Israel, and Japan tend to fall outside the main clusters, which is
probably explained by their unique historical and cultural heritage. For example, Brazil’s
uniqueness derives from its history as a Portuguese colony and therefore being the only
Portuguese-speaking country in South America, a predominantly Spanish-speaking continent.
In Brazil one finds a greater mix of different backgrounds and races, but with more
integration. Close by in Argentina, one finds predominantly Spanish spoken, a greater
identification with Europe, and less mixing of races and religion.

Cultural similarity has an obvious bearing on pattern of trade and on the likely success of
alliances or mergers between companies from those countries. For example relations between
Spain and Latin America are historically strong, with many families and educational ties. In
practice, this shows up in the representation and market interests of Spanish publishers in
South America. It also manifests itself in the Spanish pharmaceutical industry, where the
South American connection saves having to go through complicated, slow, and expensive
drug registration procedures. Most South American countries will accept Spanish
Certification.7

For similar reasons American companies often view Britain as the ideal bridgehead into
Europe. But they can run into unexpected difficulties when assuming that there is a shared
culture, or, for that matter, a shared language. In fact, while cultural similarity among
countries sometimes has the potential for creating competitive advantage, it can also be a
potential advantage.

Note:

1. S. Jourard (1964)The Transparent Self, Van Nostrand Reinhold, Princeton, NJ

2. Buchanan, S. ‘Cultural gaps can sink cross-border acquisitions’ International

Herald Tribune, January 12, 1989

3. ‘Mad dogs and expatriates, The Economist, March 3, 1984, p.67.

8|Page
 4. Stessin, L. (1979). ‘Cultural shock and the American businessman overseas’, in E.C.
Smith and L. F. Luce (eds) Towards Internationalism: Readings in Cross Cultural
Communication, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp. 214-25, p.23

5. S. Ronen and O. Shenkar (1985). ‘Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A

review and synthesis’, Academy of Management Review, 10(3), pp. 435-54.

6. Hofstede, G. (2001) Culture’s Consequences, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

7. Calori, R. and Lawrence, P. (1991) The Business of Europe: Managing Change,

London: Sage

II. Cultural Diversity: Strategies to Manage and Measure it

2.a. Leading Diversity Management Practices

The US Government Accountability Office, as part of the request that it reports on the federal
government’s performance in managing its diverse workforce, identified nine leading
diversity management practices after speaking with experts in the field or reviewing their
publications. The practices are as follows:

Leading Diversity Management Practices Identified by a Majority of Experts

Identified by a Majority of Experts1
Top leadership commitment to diversity
Inclusion of diversity as part of an organization’s strategic plan
Diversity linked to performance
Measurement of the impact of diversity programme
 Management accountability for progress of diversity initiatives
Succession planning for developing diverse talent into organization’s future leaders
Recruitment of attracting diverse applicants
Employee involvement in driving organization-wide diversity
Diversity training in order to educate employees about diversity management

Again Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD) suggests below mentioned

model for organizations to move from where most are at present to a situation in which
diversity enters the mainstream:

Managing Diversity – How to Move Equity Forward2

Group Focus Individual Focus

9|Page
 Exclusive Inclusive
application application

Holistic strategy
Piecemeal linked to business
goal

Integrating into Inclusion in to an

existing culture open culture

Removing barriers Nurturing potential

Complying with the Developing best

law practices

According to this model, a holistic and inclusive approach to managing diversity is required
which not only complies with the law but also is managed as the best practice by the
organization.

2.b. Measuring Diversity

Measuring diversity efforts is an important and challenging area in the practice of diversity.
The following steps will help to increase the likelihood that diversity initiatives will be
effectively measured:

 Identify the goals of the effort. Initiatives tend to fall into one or combination of these
categories – creating and retaining a diverse workforce, managing it, valuing a diverse
workforce or leveraging it.

 Establish clear performance indicators/benchmarks as this will help eliminate disagreement

about whether progress is being made.

 Monitor progress periodically based on established benchmarks.3

2.c. Diversity Metrics

In order to succeed, diversity initiatives require valid metrics to bench mark results and assess
whether goals have been reached. Organizations can utilize several of following metrics:

Common Diversity Metrics4

Metric Definitions

10 | P a g e
 Diversity Representation at Percentage of executives / managers
Executive / Manager Levels; level; exempt / non-exempt
Exempt / Non-Exempt Categories categories by diversity group

Turnover (voluntary/involuntary)
Diversity Turnover at Executive /
among diverse groups by executive /
Manager Levels; Exempt / Non-
manager level, exempt / non-exempt
Exempt Categories
categories

Promotion of diverse employees

Diversity Promotion Rates at groups in executives, managers,
Executive, Manager, Exempt, Non- exempt, and non-exempt levels
Exempt Levels compared to entire employee
population

Hiring of diverse employees groups

Diversity Hire Rates at Executive,
in executive, manager, exempt, and
Manager, Exempt, Non-Exempt
non-exempt levels compared to
Levels
entire employee population

Number of discrimination-related
Discrimination Grievance Rate complaints filed per employee
population

2.d. Diversity Scorecard

To measure the effects diversity programme, some organizations develop score cards. Such
score cards allow organizations to track the impact of diversity across various areas of the
business, from recruitment to turnover to training. BellSouth, an American
telecommunication holding company utilizes a four quadrant balanced scorecard to measure
diversity:

Four Components of BellSouth's Diversity Scorecard5

1. Diversity in terms of actual 2. Amount of success of diversity

numbers training

4. Effectiveness of programmes
3. Financial contribution and
and policies that create and foster
productivity of each business unit
diversity

Note:

11 | P a g e
 1. United States Government Accountability Office (January 2005), ‘Diversity
Management: Expert-Identified Leading Practices and Agency Examples’

2. Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (2007), ‘Diversity: An Overview’

3. Jim, G. (1998); ‘Key Steps in Measuring Diversity and Inclusion Effort’, Centre
Solutions;

4. DiversityInc.com (2006), ‘Measuring Your Company’s Diversity’

5. Corporate Leadership Council (July 2003), ‘Developing, Communicating, and

Measuring Diversity Initiatives’.

III. Mergers and Acquisitions

As a result of globalization, a wave of cross-border merger activities, wherein more and more
organizations are crossing their cultural and linguistic barriers has acquired impetus. The
most important factor that challenges today’s global firms is the cultural differences among
the nations or other geographic regions. From the cross-cultural perspective, success of a
global organization would depend upon the fact as to how well these differences are
embarked upon in a constructive manner.

3.a. The Impact of Cultural Differences

Even in the cruel, cruel world of business such a soft, intangible element as culture plays an
important role. Getting national cultural issues out in front of the acquisition process was a
major difficulty some years back. Potential issues of cross cultures were often not widely
recognized as critical by senior managers. However, the difficulties involved with planning
for and then implementing the merger of two different corporate cultures was soon being
recognized with the glaring examples of colossal mergers like Daimler-Chrysler and Smith
Kline-Beecham; the hardships of which have now set a milestone and created a premerger
analysis environment the world over. International mergers bring together significant cultural
differences in the way companies and people do business and work together - differences in
management styles, communication styles, organizational structure, planning, decision-
making, how teams work together and more. Each of these areas is potential hotbeds for
cultural misunderstanding, resentment and coordination breakdown.

3.b. Daimler-Chrysler Merger: A Cultural Mismatch?1

The merger agreement of Chrysler Corporation and Daimler-Benz AG was signed on 6 May
1998. Next day this American-German marriage was enounced to the whole world as the
merger of equals. The new company is called Daimler-Chrysler AG (DCX). Thanks to the
largest industrial merger at that time, DCX became the world’s fifth largest car producer,
with $ 92 billion market value, annual turnover of $130 billion, and 421,000 employees. It
was incorporated in Germany, with dual headquarters in Germany and Michigan.
Management Board was established with nine executives from each partner company having

12 | P a g e
voting power on the new Group, Juergen Schrempp, chairman of the Daimler Benz
management board, and Robert Eaton, CEO of Chrysler Corporation were to co-chair
Daimler- Chrysler.

After sometimes clashes of cultures started , Daimler-Benz was characterized by methodical

decision-making while Chrysler encouraged creativity. Chrysler was the very symbol of
American adaptability and resilience. Chrysler valued efficiency, empowerment, and fairly
egalitarian relations among staff; whereas Daimler-Benz seemed to value respect for
authority, bureaucratic precision, and centralized decision-making. These cultural differences
soon became manifest in the daily activities of the company. For example, Chrysler
executives quickly became frustrated with the attention Daimler-Benz executives gave to
trivial matters, such as the shape of a pamphlet sent to employees. Daimler-Benz executives
were equally perplexed when Eaton showed his emotions with tears in a speech to other
executives.

DCX took several initiatives to bring the two cultures closer. Press reports indicated that in
Stuttgart, the more formal Germans were experimenting with casual dress. The Germans
were also taking classes on cultural awareness. The Americans at DCX were encouraged to
make more specific plans, while the Germans were urged to experiment more freely.

In 2000, there was a management exodus at Chrysler headquarters in Detroit: two successive
Chrysler presidents, James Holden and Thomas Stallkamp, both American, were fired.
Zatsche, the newly appointed CEO of Chrysler USA, was a Daimler executive and a close
confidant of Schrempp. He, in turn, appointed Wolfgang Bernhard, another Daimler
executive, as COO. Neither had any real exposure to the US marketplace. This turn of events
demoralized Chrysler's workers. In 2001, after third quarter losses of more than half a billion
dollars, and projections of even higher losses in the fourth quarter, Schrempp told employees
that Chrysler had only 13.5% of the US market, but it was staffed as if it had a 20% share. In
early 2001, DCX announced that it would slash 26,000 jobs at its ailing Chrysler division.

The merger made good business sense. But opposing cultures and management styles proved
to be a hindrance to the realization of the synergies. Daimler-Benz attempted to run Chrysler
USA operations in the same way as it would run its German operations. This approach was
doomed to failure.

3.c. Managing Cultural Attributes in Cross –Border Mergers and

Acquisition

Although there is no specific prescribed medicine for this purpose, following programmes
will definitely help organizations to carry out their cross-cultural mergers and acquisitions
activities2:
(i) Cross-Cultural Business Awareness Training - understanding the basic cultural
differences in management styles, work styles, how teams work together, business behaviour;
(ii) Cross-Cultural Management Training - combining different management styles,
project management, leadership, motivation, setting objectives, delegation of responsibility,
decision making, building mutual respect and understanding;
(iii) Cross-Cultural Team Building Training - multinational team leadership, multinational
team building, assuring positive and clear team communications, working together from

13 | P a g e
different time zones and distant locations, team coordination, conflict resolution, building
virtual teams;
(iv) Cross-Cultural Marketing Training - understanding the different approaches to
planning and implementing marketing strategies, learning how to adapt marketing strategies
and the content and imagery of marketing communications to cultural differences; and
(v) Expatriate Training - helping the executives, managers and key personnel who will be
assigned to work in another country, where the operations of the new merged entity will take
place, to gain an in-depth understanding of each other's cultural differences - to become
aware of both their business and social behaviour, to adapt to everyday living conditions, to
avoid culture shock, and to learn the critical importance of mutual cultural respect.

Note:

1. ICMR, Centre for Management Resources, http://www.icmrindia.org

2. http://www.accenture.com

IV. Women in Management: A Cross-Cultural Overview

The growing interest in the study of women in management is triggered by the increasing
roles that women have assumed in the labour market. Over the past few decades, changes in
demographic, social, and economic forces have resulted in a large increase in the number of
women in paid employment around the world1. The International Labour Office (ILO) report
entitled Breaking Through the Glass Ceiling (1997) showed that this trend was prevalent in
many regions of the world, with some regions such as Latin America and the Caribbean
exhibiting double digit increases in the proportion of women in employment in a span of 20
years. In 1970, 38 per cent of the world’s workforce was women and by the year 2010, this
statistic is expected to exceed 41 per cent.2

4.a.The Position of Women in Management: A Cross-Cultural Comparison

Generally, in almost all countries, management is seen as a career suitable only for men and
hence is dominated by men. Even in countries where women were better educated such as
Indonesia, few women were able to secure managerial jobs, especially at senior level
positions.3 At almost every level, women managers globally complained of having to deal
with blocked mobility, discrimination, and stereotypes. Women managers were commonly
reported to be negatively affected by self belief that successful managers must exhibit male
attributes, that women were not able to combine roles of wife, mother and executive and that
others, especially men, were not willing to work under a woman boss.

Below mentioned table gives a summary of a selected number of studies on women as

managers in various countries, including Indonesia, Japan, Singapore, and the USA. The
table shows that differences across national boundaries precipitated from varying cultural
traditions, political and social policies, availability of educational opportunities and
organisational processes.
Women in Management: A Review of the Key Differences Across Culture and
National Boundaries

Influencing Elements Countries Review of Findings

Cultural Elements

14 | P a g e
 a. Noble and Indonesia3 Upper class women those from noble,
aristocracy wealthy or high ranking military families
heritage were likely to have paid employment in
professionals, civil service or family business

b. Centrality of Israel4, Hong Women do not have choice between having a

family, marriage Kong5, Singapore6 family or a career. Social expectations meant
and motherhood and UAE7 that women must put family before career

c. Influence of Hong Kong5, Stress on the subordination of a woman to

Confucianism Taiwan8, her father, husband, and son. Importance of
Singapore6 sons meant that daughters were less likely to
receive investment in their education

d. ‘Islamic’ beliefs Singapore6, Misunderstanding of Islamic teaching

Malaysia9, United resulted in strong belief that there are
Arab Emirates7 sanctions against either women working or
women seeking high level jobs in
management

Access to education Indonesia3 Better for women of noble and aristocratic

heritage

Political and Social

Policies

a. Affirmative USA10 Designed to eliminate gender base

Action and discrimination but the Japanese law is yet to
Equal be implemented in full and contain many
Opportunity loopholes. Japanese organizations are
Legislation motivated to create part time flexible jobs

b. New Population Singapore6 Incentives for motherhood: progressive, per

Policy child tax relief, rebate for levy paid to hire
foreign maid and childcare subsidy of $ 100
Singapore dollars per child per month.

c. Family Policy Japan11 Designed to encourage mothers to be more

active in their children’s welfare

Organizational
Processes

a. Geographical Japan11 Geographical mobility is a requirement for

mobility promotion. Women are often not promoted
because they are regarded as non-mobile
workers

b. Forced Japan11 This informal practice is illegal but many

retirement Japan organizations do force women to retire
upon marriage or pregnancy

15 | P a g e
 4.b. Gender-Organisation-System (GOS): Explaining the Barriers
Encountered by Women in Management

In keeping with the complex and multi-faceted nature of issues envisaged in the research of
women in management, perhaps the most useful framework for future research is based on a
theory proposed by Fagenson12 that incorporated all the above perspectives simultaneously.
The Gender- Organisation-System (GOS) framework, summarised in below mentioned
figure, endeavours to capture the complex person-organisation-societal interaction, while
acknowledging the significance of local social context that will result in the
underrepresentation of women in management. The GOS approach assumes that:

‘an individual and his/her organisations cannot be understood separately from the society
(culture) in which he or she works; and when the individual, the organisation or the system
in which they are embedded changes, the other components change as well’12

The GOS takes a more systems-oriented view of organisations, as it views the status of men
and women in organisations simultaneously with organisational and societal contexts from
which those status differentials or equalities emerged. The GOS suggests that people,
organisations, roles and societies change in response to changes in the environment, albeit at
different paces. According to Parker and Fagenson13, the different paces of changes may
explain why women’s progress towards equal representation at all levels in the organisational
hierarchy are different around the world.

APPLICATION OF THE GENDER-ORGANISATION-SYSTEM PERSPECTIVE

THE STUDY OF WOMEN AS MANAGERS12
LOCAL SOCIAL CONTEXT
Patriarchal Social System
Gender Stereotypes
Ethnic Stereotypes
Cultural and religious beliefs

PERSONAL FACTORS WORK - FAMILY ORGANISATIONAL

Personality traits, abilities COMMITMENT STRUCTURE
and skills Family gender roles Blocked Opportunities
Think Manager, Think Male Marriage pressure Networking
Desire to hold management posts Motherhood pressure Mentoring
Tokenism

WOMEN IN MANAGEMENT
Career progress
Career Barriers
Work-family responsibility
Effect of ethnicity and culture
4.c. The Roads Ahead

16 | P a g e
From the discussion above, it is hardly surprising that some women in management chose
either to remain single or be married but childless. The literature suggests that working
women may reduce role conflict by eliminating some roles14 or by limiting the time spent in
each of the roles. Clearly, the prospect of facing role conflict and the pressures that come
with it looks daunting for many women, especially for those who have high career
aspirations. Indeed, Devanna15 reported that 67 per cent of women executives she studied said
they had given up marriages, family plans and social relationships because they fear that they
did not have the capacity to deal with the pressures of combining work and family. However,
Davidson and Cooper16 disclosed that remaining single was not without its problems. Many
women in their studies revealed that the pressures of remaining single included feelings of
loneliness and isolation, having to continually justify their non-marital status, dealing with
unsympathetic peers and supervisors and receiving little emotional and domestic support.
Another common solution for reducing role conflicts is to be married but to have no children
or to have fewer in numbers. Moreover, there have been suggestions that having multiple
roles may not be as damaging as previously thought. The role accumulation theory17
maintained that the complexity, conflict and strain of roles can be overshadowed by the
rewards of having multiple roles. Multiple roles act as buffers to failure as women who failed
in one sphere can fall back to other roles thus eliminating the discomfort or even producing
an overall positive effect. Valdez and Gutek18 found support to this theory when they
observed that women who had three roles (as wives, mothers and workers) reported to have
experienced less chronic conditions and felt happier and had fewer drug prescriptions.

Note:
1. International Labour Review, 1998
2. International Labour Office, 1997

3. Wright, L. and Crockett-Tellie, V. (1994) ‘Women in Management in Indonesia’, in

Adler, N.J. and Izraeli, D.N. (Eds.) Competitive Frontiers: Women Managers in a
Global Economy, Blackwell Business.
4. Izraeli, D.N. (1994) ‘Outsiders in the Promised Land: women managers in Israel’,
in Adler, N.J. and Izraeli, D.N. (Eds.) Competitive Frontiers: Women Managers in a
Global Economy, Blackwell Business.
5. DeLeon, C.T. and Ho, S.C. (1994) ‘The third identity of modern Chinese women:
Women managers in Hong Kong’, in Adler, N. and Izraeli, D. (Eds.) Competitive
Frontiers: Women Managers in a Global Economy, Blackwell Business.
6. Chan, A. and Lee, J. (1994) ‘Women executives in a newly industrialised economy:
the Singapore scenario’, in Adler, N. and Izraeli, D. (Eds.) Competitive Frontiers:
Women Managers in a Global Economy, Blackwell Publishing.
7. Bank, J. and Vinnicombe, S. (1995) ‘Strategies for change: women in management
in the United Arab Emirates’, in Vinnicombe, S. and Colwill, N.L. The Essence of
of Women in Management, London: Prentice Hall.
8. Cheng, W.Y. and Liao, L.L. (1994) ‘Women managers in Taiwan’, in Adler, N.J.
and Izraeli, D.N. (Eds.) Competitive Frontiers: Women Managers in a Global
Economy, Blackwell Business.
9. Sieh, L.M.L., Phang, S.N., Lang, C.Y. and Mansor, N. (1991) Women Managers of
Malaysia: Faculty of Economics and Administration, University Malaya.
10. Fagenson, E. A., and Jackson, J. (1994) ‘The status of women managers in the

17 | P a g e
 United States’, in Adler, N. and Izraeli, D. (Eds.) Competitive Frontiers: Women
Managers in a Global Economy, Blackwell Publishing.
11. Lam, A.C.L. (1992) Women and Japanese Management: Discrimination and Reform,
London / New York: Routledge.
12. Fagenson, E. A (Ed.) (1993) Women in Management: Trends, Issues and Challenges
in Managerial Diversity, Women and Work, Vol. 4, Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
13. Parker, B. Fagenson, E.A. (1994) ‘An introductory overview of women in corporate
management’, in Davidson, M.J. and Burke, R.J. (Eds.) Women in Management:
Current Research Issues, London: Paul Chapman.
14. Goode, W.J. (1960) ‘A theory of role strain’, American Sociological Review
15. Devanna, M.A. (1987) ‘Women in management: progress and promise’, Human
Resource Management, Vol. 26: 452-59.
16. Davidson, M.J. and Cooper, C.L. (1992) Shattering the Glass Ceiling: The Women
Manager, London: Chapman.
17. Sieber, S.D. (1974) ‘Towards a theory of role accumulation’, American Sociological
Review, 39: 567-78.
18. Valdez, R.L. and Gutek, B.A. (1987) ‘Family roles: a help or a hindrance for working
women’, in Gutek, B.A. and Larwood, L. (Eds.) Women’s Career Development,
Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

V. Cross Cultural Communication

Communication is an interactive event during which persons assign meaning to messages and
jointly create identities and social reality. In communications between co-cultures, the
assignment of meaning to symbols requires the interpretation of those messages and adapting
to the social aspect of each individual co-culture. A numbers of problems may occur because
of ethno cultural factors such as those reflect values, beliefs, norms and symbolic meaning.
One way to describe effective communication is that which is productive and satisfying to
both the communicator and communicate. It is appropriate that we should follow rules and
expectation of each participant in communication. Due to cultural differences, however, the
rules and expectation of participant may change. Following diagram1 will help us to know
how different nationals perceive meaning of the same gesture differently:

18 | P a g e
5.a. Deal Focus (DF) vs. Relationship Focus (RF): Communication Barrier

The great divide in business culture is the Deal Focus (DF) and Relationship Focus (RF). DF
people are fundamentally task oriented while RF folks are more people-oriented. Conflicts
arise when deal focused export marketers try to do business with prospects from relationship
- focused markets. Many RF people find DF types people pushy, aggressive and offensively
blunt. In return DF types often consider their RF counter parts dilatory, vague and
inscrutable.

Deal Focused Cultures

Nordic and Germanic Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand
Moderately Deal Focused Cultures
Great Britain, South Africa, Latin Europe, Central & Eastern Europe, Chile, Southern Brazil,
Northern Mexico, Hong Kong and Singapore
Relationship Focused
The Arab World, Most of Africa, Latin America and Asia

RF and DF business culture differs in the way they communicate. DF negotiators tend to
value direct, frank, straightforward language, while their RF counterparts often favour an
indirect, subtle, roundabout style.2

Harmony Vs Clarity

It is all about question of priority. When communicating with others, the priority for DF
people is to be clearly understood: they usually say what they mean and mean what they say.
RF negotiators, on the other hand, give top priority to maintaining harmony and promoting
smooth interpersonal relations. Because preserving harmony within the group is so important,
that RF people very carefully watch what they say and do to avoid embarrassing of offending
other. Things get quite interesting, while the two parties in the negotiation are from opposite

19 | P a g e
poles, for example when most American and Japanese interact. We will not hear the word
‘No’ from Japanese. Most Japanese, Chinese and Southeast Asian will avoid the letter ‘No’,
instead they may murmur ‘That will be difficult, ‘May be’ etc.

5.b. ‘Low Context’ and ‘High Context’ Communication

Earlier we have seen that RF negotiators tend to use indirect language in order to avoid
conflict and confrontation. The polite communication of Asians, Arabs, Africans and Latins
helps maintain harmony. The meaning of what they are saying at the bargaining table is often
found more in the context surrounding the words rather than in the words themselves. The US
anthropologist Edward T. Hall (1976), the guru of cross-cultural communication, coined the
useful term ‘high-context’ for these cultures. In contrast, when northern Europeans, North
Americans, Australians and New Zealanders speak, more of the meaning is explicit –
contained in the words themselves. A listener is able to understand what they are saying at a
business meeting without referring much to the context. Hall termed these culture ‘low-
context’.

5.c. The Iceberg Metaphor

The Iceberg metaphor for culture shows a cruise ship sailing close to the iceberg for a look at
this foreign territory. Part of the iceberg is immediately visible; part of it emerges and
submerges with the tides, and its foundations go deep beneath the surface.

Above water line:

Aspects of culture are explicit, visible, taught. This includes written explanations, as well as
those thousands of skills and information conveyed through formal lessons, such as manners
or computing long division or baking bread. Also above water are the tangible aspects: from
the "cultural markers" tourists seek out such as French bread or Guatemalan weaving, to the
conformity in how people dress, the way they pronounce the letter "R", how they season their
food, the way they expect an office to be furnished.

At the water line:

The transition zone is where the cultural observer has to be more alert: "now you see it now
you don't", the area where implicit understandings become talked about, explained--mystical
experiences are codified into a creed; the area where official explanations and teachings
become irrational, contradictory, inexplicable--where theology becomes faith.

20 | P a g e
Below the water line:
"Hidden" culture: the habits, assumptions, understandings, values, judgments ... that we know
but do not or cannot articulate. Usually these aspects are not taught directly. Think about
mealtime, for example, and the order we eat foods at dinner: Do we end with dessert? With a
pickle? With tea? Nuts and cheese? Just have one course with no concluding dish? Or, in
these modern times, do we dispense with a sit-down meal altogether? Or consider how we
know if someone is treating us in a friendly manner: Do they shake hands? Keep a respectful
distance with downcast eyes? Address us by our full name? These sorts of daily rules are
learned by osmosis -- we may know what tastes "right" or when we're treated "right", but
because these judgments are under-the-waterline, it usually doesn't occur to us to question or
explain that feelings.3

5.d. Saying It Like It is vs. Saving Face

Even when indirect RF and direct DF people are both speaking the same language – English
for example – they are really speaking different languages. A Dutch or German negotiator
will choose his words carefully so that his counterparts will understand exactly what he is
saying. He wants no ambiguity, no beating around the bush.

Meanwhile his Arab, Japanese of Indonesian counterparts are choosing their words even
more carefully – but for a completely different reason. RF negotiators want to make sure that
no one at the meeting will be offended. No rude directness, no crude bluntness, no loss of
face.

When an Australian, a German or a Dane describes one as a direct, straightforward person he

may take it as a compliment. That’s because in DF cultures directness and frankness are
equated with honesty and sincerity. But those same adjectives coming from Japanese would
more likely be meant as criticism. Because in RF / high context cultures, directness and
frankness are equated with immaturity – perhaps even arrogance. In strongly RF cultures only
children and childish adults make a practice of saying exactly what they mean. They just
don’t know any better!
5.e. Training for Cross-Cultural Communication

Walking into an art gallery, one gazes upon many paintings. Examining the canvases
randomly splashed with paint, painted in blocks of solid colours and depicting strange
images, he feels perplexed. If the visitor takes an audio-guide about the paintings, which
explain the artist’s conceptions, and the meanings of images. Given this information, he finds
that the art work does not seem to be unfathomable. Now that he has a certain background, he
starts to warm to the paintings. Learning about the paintings has decreased his initial
hesitancy and help him to relate to them more easily. He has learned to understand the
language of the world of art. Similarly, cultural training can reduce hesitancy, help different
people from different cultures to relate each other, and improve the cross-cultural
communication.

21 | P a g e
5.f. Ways to improve a cross-cultural interaction
One does not need to live in a multi-national setting to experience cross-cultural interactions.
Here are a few every day examples:

• Tune in to a political argument between employees from different backgrounds or

who are strongly affiliated with particular political groups
• Watch an interaction with a parent/teacher/supervisor with someone of a different
generation.
• A conversation about the different reaction that two friends who comes from a
different background have to a TV show or political event
• Attend a public meeting that involves several constituencies.
• Intercultural non-interaction reflects cross-cultural issues in another way: notice ways
that people cluster and subtly exclude others from joining them.
• If one works in a large organization, look at how tensions between functions play out
in a conversation or a meeting (civilian/military, engineering/marketing, sales/finance,
management/line-workers, etc.)
• Watch a conversation between a man and woman, where gender-based differences in
life experience or upbringing seem to influence their interaction.
• Visit a place that isn't part of our culture like an immigrant grocery or a church that's
not our religion, a Laundromat in another neighborhood, and record a few minutes of
the interaction (verbal or not) that we had with people there.
• Watch how the cleaning and maintenance employees interact (or not) with staff in
organization.
• Any communication where one person is not speaking their native language--does this
affect how they communicate and how people respond to them?
• At the non-verbal level... in a crowded public place, look at how passersby advertise
or downplay their identity, and how others react to that.

5.g. Framework for Reconciliation of Cross-cultural Conflict4

Stages of the Process Method Employed to Arrive at Next Stage

Reaffirm our commitment to the ongoing
relationship and its benefits to both parties
Recognise where and how we differ
Continue by searching for similarities
Synthesis our solution or create outcomes
which utilise the most appropriate elements
of the opposing cultural dimensions
Review the learning process, capture it, and
make it available for the future
Think ‘win-win’ and concentrate on the
benefits of collaboration on each culture
Develop a global mindset.
Legitimise diversity.
Acquire knowledge of other cultures.
Display ‘acceptance’ when appropriate.
Employ dialogue
Practice creative thinking.
Demonstrate a willingness to learn.
Dialogue
Practice experience-based learning.
Articulate what has been seen and known.
Act on learning at a later stage

Note:

22 | P a g e
 1. http://www.1000ventures.com
2. G. R. Richard (2000), “Cross-cultural Business Behaviour”
3. William G. and Yun K Y (1995), "Communicating With Strangers: An Approach to
Intercultural Communication," in Bridges Not Walls, ed. John Stewart, (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 6th edition), pp. 429-442.
4. E. Marion, “The Art of Cross-cultural Management: an Alternative Approach to
Training and Development”; Journal of European Industrial Training, 1997,
pp. 14–18

VI. Citizen of the world: Ethics

In navigating the seas on international business, we have come to recognize culture as a

powerful force which can either undermine our best intentions and efforts or push forward
our business activities. We have used as our guide a map which indicates the cultural terrain,
or key dimensions, and suggests methods for discovering through observations, questioning,
and interpretation. This map can also serve to reveal different spheres of cultural influences –
regional, industry, corporate – and to consider the consequences of their interaction. Let us
have a look to what extent notions of business ethics and social responsibility are also
culture-bound, and whether we can ever hope to arrive at a culturally shared understanding of
and response to ethical dilemmas and social responsibility.

6.a. Why Firms Exist?

The very reason for ‘why firms exist’, or theory of firm, is also strongly influenced by
culture. The general notion is that, firms exist in order to provide benefits to the shareholders,
or to reduce transaction costs. These notions reflect underlying assumption of organizations
as instrumental, and of managers as ‘rational economic’ actors, driven be self–interest
(individualism).

23 | P a g e
In contrast, the idea that firms exist in order to promote the well-being of society (social
responsibility) reflects assumptions of organizations as ‘systems of relationships’ and of
managers as ‘paternalistic’, driven by concern for the ‘collectivism’. These notions can be
found in a growing number of company mission statements. We may consider the following
excerpts from Johnson & Johnson value system:

“We believe our first responsibility is to the doctors, nurses and patients, to mothers and
fathers and all others who use our products and services. In meeting their needs everything
we do must be of high quality. We must constantly strive to reduce our costs in order to
maintain reasonable prices. Customers’ orders must be serviced promptly and accurately.
Our suppliers and distributors must have an opportunity to make a fair
profit……………………” 1

6.b. Are ethics culture-free?

St. Thomas Aquinas, the thirteenth-century philosopher, argued that there exist a ‘natural
law’ that transcends national boundaries and which ‘encompasses the preservation of human
life, the promotion of family life, an orderly social life, and the quest for knowledge’. 2 But
throughout history, philosophers have been arguing over the proper criteria for determining
ethical behavior: utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill), rights (Kant and Locke), justice
(Aristotle), or filial piety (Confucius).

These criteria clearly reflect underlying cultural assumptions. For example, utilitarianism (the
greatest good for the greatest numbers) implies an instrumental, functionalist approach. And
rights, by what right: by hierarchy, or as D’Iribarne argued, 3 By role as in France, by contrast
as in the United States, or by consensus as in The Netherlands? Does ethics take on different
shades of truth on different sides of the Pyrenees (as stated by the sixteenth – century French
philosopher, Michel de Montaigne), or different sides of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans for
that matter?

To address this issue we need to consider what is shared and what is culture specific, and
perhaps more fundamentally, why we find similarities and differences. Only then we
consider the possibility of arriving at a shared understanding of the issues (such a corruption)
and a shared way of responding to those issues, or an agreed upon code of conduct. Again,
rather than imposing our own standards, the hope is to find ways of utilizing different cultural
assumptions in order to become truly global citizen. With this is mind we should first
consider the research evidence for cultural differences and similarities in attitudes and
responses to issue of ethics and social responsibility. We then search for the underlying
reasons.

6.c. Managing Ethical Dilemmas

While the globalization imperative has challenged fundamental cultural and business
assumptions throughout the world, many practices which may seem objectionable, remain
firmly embedded in the host-country environment. The decision has to be made whether to
impose parent company or home-country rules in host countries or to play be the local rules
of the game. Journalist Roger Williams argues that, ‘Corporations are not formed to effect
change but to sell goods. It can be pressured into treating employees more equitably. But it
cannot be expected to challenge the laws of a society. Those who insist otherwise are trying
to get a businessman to do the job of a diplomat or a soldier’.

24 | P a g e
 However, during investigations of Italy’s bribery scandals, the activities of foreign
multinationals operating in Italy (such as ABB, Siemens, and Ericsson) came under scrutiny.
At Honeywell Europe, the Italian Vice President responsible for southern Europe
acknowledged that while upholding company principles regarding ethical behavior
sometimes meant walking away from certain markets, most managers felt pride in being able
to do this.4 But to what extent does an imposing home-country or company rule reflect
cultural imperialism? In the words of Citibank,

‘We must never lose sight of the fact that we are guests in foreign countries. We must conduct
ourselves accordingly. Local governments can pass any kind of legislation, and whether we
like it or not, we must conform to it. Under these circumstances, Citibank can survive only if
we are successful in demonstrating to the local authorities that our presence is useful to
them’.

We may take case of South Africa, under apartheid, where different decisions were taken for
different reasons. Some companies such as Polaroid or General Motors chose the path of
‘civil disobedience’, operating in ways to bring about social change by breaking the rules of
apartheid. Insisting on the corporate ethic of racial equality and opportunity, for example,
these companies integrated factory washrooms and community neighborhoods.5 Over one
hundred of the US ‘Fortune 500’ companies (accounting for $2.5 billion in US FDI in Africa)
signed up, promising to adhere to the Sullivan Principles, a code of conduct for operating in
South Africa.6

These principles are shown in next page:

The Sullivan Principle7

Non-segregation of the races in all eating, comfort, locker room and work facilities
Equal and fair employment practices for all employees
Equal pay for all employees doing equal or comparable work for the same period of time
Initiation and development of training programs that will prepare blacks, coloreds, and
Asians in substantial numbers for supervisory, administrative, clerical, and technical jobs
Increasing the number of blacks, coloreds, and Asians in management and supervisory
positions
Improving the quality of employees’ lives outside the work environment in such areas as
housing, transportation, schooling, recreation, and health facilities

Other companies chose to play by the host-country (apartheid) rules for reasons such as those
expressed by Citibank. Eventually, economic sanctions imposed by the US comprehensive
Anti-Apartheid Act in November 1986 forced 49 US firms (including IBM, GM, and P&G)
to withdraw from South Africa, and another 40 the year after.

While it may not always be clear what is right and wrong (acute dilemmas), it may also be
the case that one knows what is right or wrong but fails to do it (acute rationalization). 8 What
are the appropriate criteria for judging ethical behavior: ‘How it would look in the press’
(‘the best disinfectant is sunlight’); or ‘How it would look in the mirror’? Is it enough to

25 | P a g e
consult your personal sense of right and wrong? Or is this an individual or collective
(company, community, or national) process? These issues need to be addressed by both the
managers and their companies, in order to define their role as global citizens.

6.d. Developing Corporate Integrity

Individual managers need to take stock not only of their own culture and moral baggage, but
also that their profession (such as consultants and auditors), company, industry, or host
country. It is important to assess how these different spheres of cultural influence contribute
to ethical behavior. While one’s own moral position needs to be well defined, one must
recognize how these external pressures, however subtle, may influence our judgment. In this
way, morality is both an individual and collective affair.

Harvard Professor Lynne Paine (1974)9 provides the guidelines for developing strategies for
integrity, as shown below:

Developing Corporate Integrity

1. Guiding values and commitments make sense and are clearly communicated
2. Company leaders are personally committed, credible, and willing to take action on the
values they espouse
3. Espoused values are integrated into the normal channels of management decision-
making and are reflected in the organization’s critical activities
4. Company systems and structures support and reinforce its values
5. Managers throughout the company have the decision making skills, knowledge, and
competencies needed to make ethically sound decisions on a day to day basis

6.e. Globalization

In order to address these issues of what is ethical and what guidelines need to be followed,
companies need to provide opportunity for open discussion, without fear of punishment. It
may be that ‘……….. levels of moral reasoning and judgment are likely to be higher when
managers get together and discuss ethical issues than when these choices have to be made in
solitude’10

In the words of Harold Perlmutter, Professor of International Business at Wharton, ‘By the
first global civilization we mean a world order, with shared values, processes, and structures:

1. Whereby nations and cultures become more open to influence by each other,
2. Whereby there is recognition of identities and diversities of peoples in various
groups, and ethnic and religious pluralism,
3. Where people of different ideologies and values both corporate and compete but
no ideology prevails over all other,
4. Where global civilization becomes unique in a holistic sense while still being
pluralist, and heterogeneous in its character, and

26 | P a g e
 5. Where increasingly these values are perceived as shared despite varying
interpretations, such as we currently see for the values of openness, human rights,
freedom, and democracy’ 11

Thus rather than corporate soldiers sent out to the battlefield to wage economic warfare,
managers become global citizens engaged in making the world a better place through
economic development.

Note:

1. Johnson & Johnson, www.jnjindia.com

2. Becker, H. and Fritzsche, D.J. (1987); ‘A Comparison of the ethical behavior of
American, French and German managers’, Columbia Journal of World Business,
Winter, pp. 87-95.
3. D’Iribarne, P. (1989), La Logique de l’Honneur, Paris:Seuil.
4. Schneider, S. C., Wittenberg-Cox, A. and Hanson, L. (1990) Honeywell, Europe,
INSEAD Case.
5. ‘Companies try a new tack: Civil disobedience’, Business Week, October 13, 1985,
p.27.
6. Sherman, S. P. (1984), ‘Scoring corporate conduct in South Africa’, Fortune, July 9,
pp. 168-72.
7. ‘The case for doing business in South Africa’, Fortune, June 19, 1978.
8. Stark, A. (19993) ‘What’s the matter with business ethics?’ Harvard Business Review,
May – June, pp. 38-48.
9. L. S. Paine (1974). ‘Managing for organizational integrity’, Harvard Business
Review, March – April, p.112.
10. Posner, B. Z. and Schmidt, W.H. (1984) ‘Values and the American manager: An
update’, California Management Review, 26(3), pp. 210-12.
11. Perlmutter, H. V. (1991), ‘On the rocky road to the first global civilization’, Human
Relations, 44(9), pp. 897-920, p.898

27 | P a g e